• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2024

The insolvency proceedings, which are collective debt processing procedures that equitably distribute properties of the debtor who is declared insolvency to multiple creditors, and the arbitral proceedings that resolve disputes over individual legal relationships between the parties differ in nature. However, there are no express provisions that directly regulate the legal relationships when the party to an arbitration agreement is declared insolvency. The presence of an arbitration agreement between the parties does not necessarily initiate the arbitral proceedings, the arbitral proceedings are initiated by the parties' application under the arbitration agreement. It is also necessary to examine the effect of the insolvency of the party to the arbitration agreement on the arbitral proceedings step by step. This paper reviews the cases in which the parties to the arbitration agreement have been declared insolvency before the commencement of the arbitral proceedings and have been declared insolvency during the arbitral proceedings. This paper examines how the effect of the arbitration agreement affects the insolvency proceedings when the debtor is declared insolvency after concluding the arbitration agreement and how the declaration of insolvency affects the arbitral proceedings when the debtor, who is a party to the arbitration agreement, is declared insolvency during the arbitration proceedings.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.81-94
• /
• 2022

Real estate and artworks were considered challenging investment targets for individual investors because of their relatively high average transaction price despite their long investment history. Recently, the so-called fractional investment, generally known as investing in a share of the ownership right for real-life assets, etc., and most investors perceive that they actually own a piece (fraction) of the ownership right through their investments, is gaining popularity. Founded in 2016, Musicow started the first service that allows users to invest in copyright fees related to music distribution. Using the LSTM algorithm, one of the deep learning algorithms, this research predict the price of right to participate in copyright fees traded in Musicow. In addition to variables related to claims such as transfer price, transaction volume of claims, and copyright fees, comprehensive indicators indicating the market conditions for music copyright fees participation, exchange rates reflecting economic conditions, KTB interest rates, and Korea Composite Stock Index were also used as variables. As a result, it was confirmed that the LSTM algorithm accurately predicts the transaction price even in the case of fractional investment which has a relatively low transaction volume.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.83-153
• /
• 2015

As our economy grows and the number of aircraft increase, the number of civil execution against aircraft cases are likely to increase as well in the future. The purpose of this article is to present the legal theory on the civil execution against aircrafts by drawing on the legal theory on the civil execution against vessels which constitute a relatively large number of cases thus observed. The provisions of the civil execution against immovables or vessel, shall basically apply mutatis mutandis to the civil execution against aircraft or light aircraft. The civil execution against ultra-light flying devices or a foreign aircraft shall be executed in conformity with the civil execution against movables. There are a compulsory auction, an auction to execute a security right to aircraft, and an auction under the right of retention, etc. in the civil execution against an aircraft. A compulsory execution against an aircraft means an execution carried out by a creditor against a debtor's aircraft to obtain satisfaction of claims for the purpose of payment of money. The court of execution of a compulsory execution against an aircraft shall be the district court having jurisdiction over the airport of stoppage or storage of such aircraft at the time of seizure. The forums of execution of a compulsory execution against an aircraft shall be exclusive forums. When a court has rendered an order on commencing an auction, it shall order an execution officer to receive a certificate of the aircraft's registration and other documents as required for its operation, and to submit them to the court. A court may revoke the procedures for a compulsory auction when an execution officer fails to obtain a transfer of the aircraft's registration certificate, etc. and the location of the aircraft is not evident, not later than an elapse of 2 months from the date on which an order on commencing an auction has been rendered. In the case where it is deemed that there exists a business-related need or other based on proper reasoning, the court may permit the aircraft's operation, upon the motion submitted by the debtor. In this case, there shall be a consent from the creditor, the highest bidder, the next highest bidder and successful bidder. A court may, upon a motion submitted by the creditor, make the dispositions required for observing and preserving the aircraft. When a debtor has submitted the documents under subparagraph 2 or 4 of the Article 49 of the Civil Execution Act, and furnished the guarantee equivalent to the claims of the execution creditors and the creditors demanding a distribution and to the costs for execution, before a declaration of bid, the court shall, upon request, revoke other procedures than those for distribution. The provisions of a obligatory auction against vessel or aircraft and an auction to execute a security right to real estate or vessel, shall apply mutatis mutandis to an auction to execute the security right to aircraft. In an auction to execute the security right to aircraft case, an executive title is not necessary. An executory exemplification is not necessary in an application for an auction to execute the security right to aircraft. A court should examine the existence of security right and claim secured. No order on commencing an auction procedure shall be issued with non-existence or invalidity of the security right and absence or extinguishment of the claim secured. Furthermore, these prohibitions are the reason of a decision on non-permit for sale, the court overlooked these prohibitions, and the decision on a permit for sale became final and conclusive, the successful bidder who paid the price and registered of ownership could not acquire ownership of the aircraft sold. A court may render a ruling to put plural aircrafts up for a blanket auction, only when they are in restraint and related matter (Supreme Court Order 2001Ma3688 dated on August 22, 2001). A righter of retention on aircraft may file a request for an auction against the aircraft. The provisions of an auction to execute a security right to aircraft shall apply mutatis mutandis to the formal auction. Airport facility fee and an aircraft are not in restraint and related matter, so an airport management corporation does not hold the right of retention on the aircraft (Supreme Court Decision 2011Da29291 decided on April 10, 2014). In an auction in accordance with the right of retention, all encumbrances (e.g., mortgages) on the sold aircraft shall be extinguished by a sale under the legal conditions for sale. Not only creditors who have claims for preferential payment but also general creditors could demand for distribution. The precedence of the claim of the right of retention on aircraft and that of general creditor's claims are equal.